Networked Knowledge - Media Report

This version of the report has been prepared by: Dr Robert N Moles
Underlining where it occurs is for editorial emphasis]

List of Australian, UK and USA miscarriage of justice cases
Article on Australian miscarriage of justice cases
Article on UK miscarriage of justice cases
Article on USA miscarriage of justice cases

On 5 December 2006 Jeremy Roberts of The Australian reported “DPP takes dismissed case to highest court”.

He said the South Australian Director of Public Prosecutions wants several politicians and political staffers to give evidence in the state's highest court to dispute claims of pedophilia in high places. In an extraordinary move, DPP Stephen Pallaras has ignored a magistrate's decision in August to toss out seven charges of criminal defamation because of a lack of evidence, and now wants the three defendants tried in the state's highest court. Wendy Utting, Barry Standfield and Craig Ratcliff caused a political storm in March last year when they allegedly told journalists that a Rann government MP, a former Liberal MP and two senior police officers were pedophiles. The names were never published in South Australia and are legally suppressed in this case.

A police investigation failed to substantiate the claims, but Ms Utting, Mr Standfield and Mr Ratcliff were charged with nine counts of criminal defamation. Last Friday in the South Australian District Court, prosecutor Martin Hinton said the charges must be heard in the "public interest" in the state's Supreme Court. "The defamatory statements were of a particularly insidious nature made against people in high public office ... that may require evidence having to be given," Mr Hinton said.

During the month-long controversy the Government made no public comment, but briefed media organisations that any media which published the name of the Labor MP would face charges of criminal defamation. Adelaide magistrates were disqualified from hearing the charges, and District Court judge Marie Shaw acted as a magistrate at the committal stage. In August she tossed out seven of the nine charges as "no case to answer". Another charge was withdrawn and Mr Ratcliff remains charged on a single count based on statements allegedly made to a television program several years before the controversy.

In court before District Court judge David Lovell, Mr Hinton admitted the DPP disagreed with Judge Shaw's decision, and so had issued an "ex-officio indictment" which again brings the charges to court without committal. He said the trial would attract great public interest and so should be heard by a "red judge" of the Supreme Court. "At the moment in the community pedophilia and sexual abuse is something that attracts great public comment and great sanction," Mr Hinton said. "It is entirely within contemplation that the Crown will call, for example, one of the defamed or all of the defamed people and they will be put in the witness box and questions will be put to them as to their involvement in pedophilia. "Suddenly (the case) becomes a showcase in some ways for matters of high public interest."

George Mancini, for Ms Utting, opposed the application to move the case to the Supreme Court. "To grant the application is tantamount to undermining public confidence in this (District) court," he said. Judge Lovell asked for further written submissions and reserved his decision.

Top of Page